Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
> I finally had a few free cycles, so I fixed up the eselect-compiler
> ebuild to better handle the transition from gcc-config and updated
> toolchain.eclass to better work with multilib. I've had a bunch of help
> from the amd64 devs/testers/users this past week testing i
I finally had a few free cycles, so I fixed up the eselect-compiler
ebuild to better handle the transition from gcc-config and updated
toolchain.eclass to better work with multilib. I've had a bunch of
help from the amd64 devs/testers/users this past week testing it out,
and I think it's r
On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 19:48 +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Friday 02 June 2006 18:47, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > Actually this is probably the main problem of all the "package manager
> > compability" gleps: We don't have a proper specification, all existing
> > docs more or less are based on the e
Hi,
It is my pleasure to inform you that after much discussion I can
announce that Joshua Jackson (tsunam) has come onboard to act as my
co-lead in Userrel[1].
Wish him luck, I suspect he will need it!
[1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/user-relations/index.xml
--
$a="gentoo.org"; Chris
On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 15:26 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> First off, I'd like to apologize for cross-posting this, but I've been
> pestered by this enough recently to want to try to reach as much of the
> developer pool as possible.
>
> If you add any amd64 KEYWORDS to *any* packages in the tre
First off, I'd like to apologize for cross-posting this, but I've been
pestered by this enough recently to want to try to reach as much of the
developer pool as possible.
If you add any amd64 KEYWORDS to *any* packages in the tree, make sure
you've updated your profiles directory before doing your
Stephen Bennett wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jun 2006 19:48:39 +0200
Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem is actually that such a document is a living thing and it
must not only exist initially but be maintained continuously.
Must it? I'd be more inclined to say that if it needs to cha
On Fri, 2 Jun 2006 19:48:39 +0200
Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem is actually that such a document is a living thing and it
> must not only exist initially but be maintained continuously.
Must it? I'd be more inclined to say that if it needs to change, a new
specification
On Friday 02 June 2006 18:47, Marius Mauch wrote:
> Actually this is probably the main problem of all the "package manager
> compability" gleps: We don't have a proper specification, all existing
> docs more or less are based on the existing portage implementation. So
> right now the implementation
On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 16:17:06 +
Ferris McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Grant,
> Apologies; I can't find your note from yesterday, so I can't respond
> to the correct topic.
> One question just occurred to me; if it's been addressed before,
> apologies about that, too. Your requireme
On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 16:17:06 +
Ferris McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What about ebuilds which for
> whatever reason are invalid (serious specification violation, for
> example, to the extent that QA would reject them), but portage accepts
> them anyway. Must the alternative accept the
Grant,
Apologies; I can't find your note from yesterday, so I can't respond
to the correct topic.
One question just occurred to me; if it's been addressed before,
apologies about that, too. Your requirement that any alternative
package manager support any ebuild which portage supports seems
es
Hi Gentoo,
dev-libs/libvc, app-misc/rolo and mail-client/mutt-vc-query were masked
because of the open security bug #127757. It also seems like there was
no upstream release for like 3 years, so this packages are pretty much
dead.
If nobody speaks up or volunteers as maintainer for that cruft, th
On Sunday 28 May 2006 21:20, Ned Ludd wrote:
> The following maintainers and maintaining herds are affected by this
> in one way or another. This list is still far to large for me want to
> file a bug for.. So please do what you can to help narrow this list
> down.
>
> Granted not all cases can be
Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> Would it be possible to do automatic detection and unicode conversion in the
> portage install stage? I think that would probably be the best option. At a
> later stage a simple detection and warning might be sufficient.
Tricky. You can parse a file and check if it's vali
Simon Stelling wrote:
> You forgot to mention which package uses the variable.
>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Need a use-expanded TV_GRAB variable for xmltv
;)
--
jakub
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Thu, 1 Jun 2006 21:08:54 +0200
Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 01 June 2006 20:19, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> > Wiktor Wandachowicz wrote:
> > > Summing up:
> > > * UTF-8 manuals: good or bad?
> >
> > The Only Way To Go (tm), IMHO. Let's let the legacy encodings die
> > in pie
You forgot to mention which package uses the variable.
--
Kind Regards,
Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 Developer
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Friday 02 June 2006 00:33, Mark Loeser wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
> > vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
> > Gentoo dev list to see.
>
> As I requested in an earlier email,
On Friday 02 June 2006 00:16, Stephen Bennett wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Jun 2006 21:44:39 +0200
>
> Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I would like the council to discuss GLEP 49 as has been discussed on
> > the list some weeks ago. It is about the package manager requirements.
>
> Isn't it cus
20 matches
Mail list logo
